Make / publication practice
Peer review: what the process can and cannot show
Peer review is a critical reading of a manuscript, not a guarantee that every finding is true. This is an educational guide to review practices, not an operating Mynd journal policy.
Separate review from proof
ICMJE describes peer review as assessment by experts who are usually outside a journal's editorial staff. It can help authors improve reporting and help editors choose work for their journal. That role is different from repeating an experiment or proving a treatment effective. Keep judging the study question, design, results and limits even when a paper has been reviewed.
Evidence: ICMJE: Submission and peer-review responsibilities
Look for a described process
Journals differ in which manuscripts they send for review, how many reviewers they use and whether identities are open or anonymized. ICMJE recommends a clear public description of the process. A label saying "peer reviewed" does not tell you these details. A Mynd journal and its review board remain planned; this page does not offer submission or review services.
Evidence: ICMJE: Submission and peer-review responsibilities
Keep the editor and reviewer roles distinct
Reviewers provide critical assessments, but the editor is responsible for selecting the journal's content. A journal need not send every submission for review or follow every reviewer recommendation. Good evaluation also needs access to relevant supplementary material, protocols and analysis plans, with reviewer comments considered in the context of declared relationships and activities.
Evidence: ICMJE: Submission and peer-review responsibilities
Handle confidentiality and conflicts
Submitted manuscripts are confidential communications. Reviewers should not reuse an author's unpublished ideas or publicly discuss the manuscript. ICMJE asks reviewers to disclose relationships that could bias their assessment and step aside when a conflict exists. Disclosure is wider than direct research funding: financial interests, personal relationships and academic competition can also matter.
Evidence: ICMJE: Submission and peer-review responsibilities / ICMJE: Financial and non-financial disclosures
Leave room for criticism after publication
Review does not end the need for questions. ICMJE recommends a way for readers to comment on published work and expects authors to cooperate when questions require more information. Funding and disclosure statements help readers assess possible influence, but a disclosed relationship alone does not prove a study is wrong. Transparent methods and a bounded conclusion remain necessary.
Evidence: ICMJE: Submission and peer-review responsibilities / ICMJE: Financial and non-financial disclosures
Source note
This is general health-science education. No clinical review has been performed.
Educational guide only. No Mynd journal issue, reviewer board, submission process or accreditation is established.